Home | Business News | Browse by Publication | A | Academic Exchange Quarterly

Learning preferences/instruction in General Chemistry.

Article Excerpt
Abstract

Correlations between students' auditory, visual and tactile-kinesthetic learning preferences, traditional and non-traditional course components and levels of success in General Chemistry have been assessed. Tactile-kinesthetic learners showed greatest perseverance and tendency for involvement in the non-traditional course components studied, computer-aided instruction and peer-led-team-learning. Even though there were correlations between this involvement and success in the course, these students appeared to remain at a disadvantage by the traditional measures of written examinations.

Introduction

Students do not all learn in the same ways. Gardner [1], Guilford [2], Sternberg [3], and others [4] have posited theories suggesting that intelligence, once characterized strictly as "book smarts", is actually an aggregate measure of the strength of a variety of components. These theories fall under the broader heading of Multiple Intelligences. Howard Gardner [1], a leader in multiple intelligence theory, has identified at least eight different components to intelligence (see Fig. 1). See issue's website

The levels of these components vary between individuals. In classroom and laboratory situations, the learner will demonstrate these as preferences for, or tendencies to gravitate toward, particular kinds of instruction or assessment. Gardner refers to each of these preferences separately as intelligences [4]. These leamer preferences are, to some extent, based upon the learner's successes in prior learning experiences where instructional strategies employed complimented their preferences. As an example, application of Gardner's theory to the learner profiled in Figure 1 would likely lead to an assessment that the learners preference is predominantly "tactile/kinesthetic." According to the characteristics of this intelligence, this student would probably learn best when information is presented to him/her via manipulatives and other concrete objects or physical representations. That is, this learner is more likely to grasp and internalize the salient characteristics of concepts that are presented to him/her as a physical model (the more hands-on, the better). By further examining the learner's profile, we would expect that instructional strategies that are predominantly visual and/or auditory (like lecture/discussion) would be less likely to result in the student learning efficiently and correctly internalizing the characteristics of content.

Similar predictive scenarios may be drawn when the learning preferences of students are known and responded to via the intentional use of a variety of instructional strategies aimed at supporting predominant learning preferences. When learners experience success via instructional strategies that support their dominant intelligence, the learners' awareness of their own learning preferences is strengthened. The result of this experience may be that learners will recognize, gravitate to, and benefit from similar instructional experiences that are supportive of their learning preference. It is important to note that nearly all learners have some measure of all the intelligences listed, and that most are capable of learning something from any clear instructional strategy or supplemental learning device. The extent...

View this article FREE - Now for a Limited Time, try Goliath Business News
Free for 3 Days!